# Phrases you can't believe don't exist on the internet **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [November 24, 2017, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577 "2017-11-24T05:34:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![KellyCriterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b3f665/32.png) [@KellyCriterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyCriterion)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/1 "2017-11-24T05:34:44Z")
If you go to Google and put a phrase in quotation marks, like this: “To be or not to be” … then run a search, you get a list of pages with that phrase on it. Sometimes I am shocked to learn that some phrases (or sentence fragments), return zero results. Like this one: “_hoping he’d do me a favor_” - **0 results**. Really, internet? ---
**Author:** ![Lickety\_Split\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/67e7ee/32.png) [@Lickety\_Split\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lickety_Split_1)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 5:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/2 "2017-11-24T05:43:35Z")
You just have to know how to run the searches. Lose the quotation marks and you’ll get a bunch of hits. When you use quotes you are effectively eliminating about 80% of the Boolean logic gates that comprise the algorithm that primarily drives Google’s Search engine. Google is so good that it knows when a search topic, like the one you used as an example in your OP, is basically meaningless since it is so common. It needs context, in other words. It’s “GIGO” all over again! Don’t blame Google. Rather, as tech guys sometimes say…“PBK.” LOL ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 7:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/3 "2017-11-24T07:56:22Z")
It’s not even true! I got one hit when I googled “hoping he’d do me a favor” 😃 ---
**Author:** ![DorkVader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/73ab20/32.png) [@DorkVader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DorkVader)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 9:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/4 "2017-11-24T09:15:52Z")
I got two hits plus five images with the phrase “hoping he’d do me a favor”🆒😃 ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/5 "2017-11-24T09:49:07Z")
> [@Lickety\_Split](#): > > You just have to know how to run the searches. > > Lose the quotation marks and you’ll get a bunch of hits. When you use quotes you are effectively eliminating about 80% of the Boolean logic gates that comprise the algorithm that primarily drives Google’s Search engine. Google is so good that it knows when a search topic, like the one you used as an example in your OP, is basically meaningless since it is so common. It needs context, in other words. It’s “GIGO” all over again! Don’t blame Google. Rather, as tech guys sometimes say…“PBK.” > > LOL Yes, he does know how. He wants a phrase, so he encloses his phrase in quotation marks. If he was looking for “a bunch of hits” that contain “a bunch of words” in no particular pattern, he knows how to do that, too. But it would be of no relevance to his question. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/6 "2017-11-24T11:14:07Z")
I get precisely one hit for [“You’re A Bad Man, Charles Manson”](https://www.google.com/search?q=%22You%27re+A+Bad+Man,+Charles+Manson%22) and only three for [“You’re A Bad Man, Charlie Manson”](https://www.google.com/search?ei=of4XWq_LE4vSjwTFnKS4Bg&q=%22You%27re+A+Bad+Man%2C+Charlie+Manson%22&oq=%22You%27re+A+Bad+Man%2C+Charlie+Manson%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3..35i39k1.35529.36242.0.36468.7.7.0.0.0.0.222.573.0j3j1.4.0....0...1.1.64.psy-ab..3.1.222....0.RsPeayOWmBk). I thought the Charlie Manson/Charlie Brown nexus would be larger, myself. ---
**Author:** ![Ximenean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/aca169/32.png) [@Ximenean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ximenean)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 11:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/7 "2017-11-24T11:33:28Z")
It’s the internet, so how about “having considered your counterargument, I concede that I was wrong”? Zero results. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 11:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/8 "2017-11-24T11:35:46Z")
**Parbunkells** : [Internet Art: the parbunkells billboard - Mundane Pointless Stuff I Must Share (MPSIMS) - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=773735) (Link to a thread about an art project based on Internet search.) ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 12:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/9 "2017-11-24T12:56:45Z")
> [@guestchaz](#): > > I got two hits plus five images with the phrase “hoping he’d do me a favor”🆒😃 How many were pr0n? ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/10 "2017-11-24T13:05:54Z")
> [@KellyCriterion](#): > > Really, internet? Yes, really. What makes you think that phrase should somehow return a result (in quotation marks)? All the kids are saying it these days? Or what? It’s the title of your favorite Walt Whitman poem? ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/11 "2017-11-24T13:23:59Z")
> [@Lickety\_Split](#): > > . . . Google is so good that it knows when a search topic, like the one you used as an example in your OP, is basically meaningless since it is so common. It needs context . . . Or put another way, Google is good enough that it doesn’t identify the phrase itself–_ **as a specific phrase** _, i.e., in quotation marks–as occurring enough to demonstrate any connection to a linguistic community of practice. The premise of the OP is comparing apples with oranges. ---
**Author:** ![DorkVader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/73ab20/32.png) [@DorkVader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DorkVader)\ **Post date:** [November 24, 2017, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/12 "2017-11-24T22:17:33Z")
> [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](#): > > How many were pr0n? SIGH! none, the images were actually all page elements of the SDMB ---
**Author:** ![Gatopescado](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gatopescado/32/5711_2.png) [@Gatopescado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gatopescado)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2017, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/13 "2017-11-26T00:11:18Z")
I can think of one phrase I _really_ wish I never Googled. Let’s just say that if you need parts for an old “Ford-a-Matic”, be careful what you click on. ---
**Author:** ![Cleophus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a88e57/32.png) [@Cleophus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cleophus)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2017, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/14 "2017-11-26T19:20:34Z")
Google doesn’t make exhaustive exact-text matches across their entire database, and they further index pages by internally generated keywords. In all likelihood, when you do a quoted search Google breaks down the terms, does a “normal” search for the keywords, and only highlights the matching phrase in the results after the fact. The key to why Google can handle so much data is that their search algorithm is a “fuzzy” search that allows for false negatives. Google ranks relevance including factors such as how often a page is linked to, the surrounding terms, how often it is visited, and other factors they keep proprietary, even further weighted by your own search history. So, it’s not unexpected Google would fail to find an obscure phrase on a barely-visited page. ---
**Author:** ![j666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9de0a6/32.png) [@j666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/j666)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2017, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/15 "2017-11-26T19:31:59Z")
“hoping he **would** do me a favor” gets a hit ---
**Author:** ![KellyCriterion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b3f665/32.png) [@KellyCriterion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KellyCriterion)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2017, 3:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/phrases-you-cant-believe-dont-exist-on-the-internet/802577/16 "2017-12-01T03:13:30Z")
> [@Cleophus](#): > > Google doesn’t make exhaustive exact-text matches across their entire database, and they further index pages by internally generated keywords. In all likelihood, when you do a quoted search Google breaks down the terms, does a “normal” search for the keywords, and only highlights the matching phrase in the results after the fact. > > The key to why Google can handle so much data is that their search algorithm is a “fuzzy” search that allows for false negatives. Google ranks relevance including factors such as how often a page is linked to, the surrounding terms, how often it is visited, and other factors they keep proprietary, even further weighted by your own search history. So, it’s not unexpected Google would fail to find an obscure phrase on a barely-visited page. Can you give me an example of a sentence fragment that exists on a website indexed by Google, that doesn’t show in a search result when you Google that exact phrase/sentence fragment?